Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-09-Speech-2-231"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020409.10.2-231"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of our group, I too should like to thank the rapporteur for the work she has done, and I should like to focus on three issues while adopting a very practical and less political approach, as many of my fellow MEPs have already mentioned.
The first issue is that of languages, and we have tabled an amendment on this, Amendment No 31, because it is indeed of major importance for the European patent to be established on behalf of industry in Europe, which forms one big market, and we therefore regret the fact that this was postponed during the Laeken Summit to 21 May. The discussion surrounding the language issue bears more witness to a political sentiment than to a sense of reality, as I have already stated. We agreed in Lisbon to turn the European economy into the world’s most competitive knowledge economy, and I am of the view that, when it really comes down to it, we will not act on this intention, which is evident from the many amendments on this topic.
The linguistic costs will push up the price of the patent disproportionately high, which will adversely affect the competitiveness of businesses within this European market compared to businesses in other major markets, such as the United States and Japan. European industry has itself indicated that it will not be using the European patent if it turns out to be too costly.
Then I should like to mention the jurisdiction. We take the view, unlike Mr Lehne, that a European patchwork quilt, where each court provides a different interpretation of the European Community patent, would not be beneficial. We are of the opinion that one central court of law should be set up which passes judgments in first instance, and that the European Court of Justice should subsequently handle appeal cases.
Finally, I should like to touch upon the constitutional question. As Liberals we would welcome one European patent in Europe, independently of the Convention, in other words without joining the Convention, thus ensuring that the European Parliament retains a democratic hold on the European patent and that European legislation can be adapted to the European patent. Mr President, I thank you for this opportunity, and I thank you all for your attention."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples